It’s not just those on the left, either. Many moderates are telling us how to fix things. You know, of course that they want us to lose again. Whenever your enemy gives you advice their motives are to weaken you.

Before we get started discussing the advice we are getting consider this: In 2008 we nominated a moderate to run for President. Wishy washy John McCain didn’t have any positions that were much different than those espoused by Obama. He was an establishment tax and spend politician. His campaign generated yawns among voters; until he selected a real Conservative spending cutter as his running mate. Suddenly Republican voters began paying attention and Governor Palin generated the excitement that he couldn’t. In spite of running a lousy campaign he came pretty close to a win.

The TEA Party began meeting and working to inject fiscally conservative ideas and candidates into the electorate. The GOP won big in 2010.

In 2012 the Republican party finally settled on a fiscally and socially liberal big spender in Mitt Romney. Conservatives, evangelicals, and others were underwhelmed. He was defeated. We should learn from history.

It can move forward things in a good way. I think the tea party is going to have to look at itself. It’s been so helpful to the Republican Party in the past. It saved it by not going third party in 2010, helping the Republicans sweep the House. But the tea party style of rage is not one that wins over converts and makes people lean towards them and say, ‘I want to listen to you.’ I think a friendly persuasion has to begin now from the Republican Party to people of the United States.”

It seems to me that she doesn’t have the best interest of conservatives in her heart. We have tried her ideas and they have failed. We don’t need a kinder, gentler, liberal light GOP. History has shown us that the American people want honesty and they want self reliance. I don’t think Romney lost because Americans wanted Santa Claus. Both he and Obama were Santa Claus candidates – just to differing degrees. If the choice is between Santa and Santa light the takers will opt for the bigger Santa. Americans who believe in American excellence and freedom won’t have a candidate. Many of them will stay home. That’s what happened.

Andrew Sullivan is also no conservative. He writes for the Daily Beast.

On Friday he provided some advice for Republicans. “Move away from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News has to be demonized and cut off.”

The first conservative who will be the future of that party will be the one that says Rush Limbaugh does not speak for the Republican Party,” Sullivan said. “He is a poison on the discourse, and until they start — you see, the media-industrial complex on the right is so lucrative they don’t want to lose it. And it is now controlling a political party. That has to be severed. Fox News has to be demonized and cut off.”

Sullivan is not advising us how to win. He is telling us what he, a hard-left liberal, would like us to do. We should do exactly the opposite of what people like he advises.

Next, George Will writes a column in the Washington Post. Will is an old-line moderate masquerading as a conservative. Kind of WaPo’s version of conservatism. In his November 9 column he says that Romney lost because he wasn’t ‘likeable’ enough. He says:

On Feb. 11, 2011, the person who should have been the Republican nominee laconically warned conservatives about a prerequisite for persuading people to make painful adjustments to a rickety entitlement state. Said Indiana’s Gov. Mitch Daniels: “A more affirmative, ‘better angels’ approach to voters is really less an aesthetic than a practical one. With apologies for the banality, I submit that, as we ask Americans to join us on such a boldly different course, it would help if they liked us, just a bit.” Romney was a diligent warrior. Next time, Republicans need a more likable one.”

So he liked Daniels for the job. What he is still promoting is the ‘Santa Lite’ candidate. What we need is someone who will Cut Spending drastically. That is not what Will calls for.

The Republican party has found a way to lose elections. They need to turn away from that and get back to conservative roots of low taxes, small government and frugal spending.

Yes, that is very important. Still, spending isn’t as much of a problem when the economy is booming. The only way to maintain our standard of living is with growth. It is possible, but the government needs to get out of the way and let the Mitt Romney’s of America do what they do.

“The erosion of the rights of the American people.”

The number one right being eroded is property rights and its sub-right, the right to enjoy the fruits of our own labor. If the government gets out of the way of the private sector and respects private property, the most important rights will be safe.

Is Santorum our only other option? And ‘Terrified’ seems like hyperbole.

I understand, RD, that you are a businessman. I was at one time as well. When I was in business almost all my focus was on my company. I get that we are focused primarily on that which our focus is on. If I was still in business I probably would have weighted my concerns much like you did.

From a different vantage point, that of a grandfather, I fear for the debt our grandchildren are inheriting and how it will hurt their future.

I don’t believe for a second that our problem in this election was Mitt Romney and some fabled conservative would have fixed it. Our problem is a media driven culture and a slick shyster of a Democratic president who will whisper things that itching ears desperately want to hear.

Is there reservoir of conservative voters out there who stayed home but who would have come out and voted if, and only if, their exact flavor of right-wing politician would have been nominated? Maybe, but if there is such a group, their exact flavor of right-wing politician would have cost three times their numbers in losses among moderates.

Look, the culture is drifting left. We are now the monks keeping the flame of enlightenment lit through the long, dark ages ahead. Eventually, following a period of deep pain, there will be a new enlightenment and the people will once again look to us for answers. That is our role.

I’ll grant you the observation that the business of America is business. No argument.

There are other aspects of America that I consider to be important. I think the soul of America is freedom, for instance, even though I try to stay away from this sort of over arching mottos or simple sayings.

And yes there is a reservoir of voters out there who didn’t vote for Romney because he wasn’t conservative enough for them. Limbaugh has had several call him since the election. I am also very aware of Libertarians and members of the Constitutional party here in this county who voted against Romney for the same reasons. I know some personally.

I also know that politics is coalition building. Terms like ‘Exact flavor’ are designed to prevent coalitions. Was it Reagan who noted that you could agree with someone who you agreed with 80% of the time? Or was it 70%? I have heard both.

I find it suspicious that leftists have chosen to tell us how to win in the future. That’s what this post is about.

Yes it is dusk. Night will come and it will be a dangerous, difficult one. Normally, however, dawn follows night. I prefer to focus at this moment on the dawn. I will have to deal with the night but right now dusk brings thoughts of the coming day. I call it practicing mental health.

‘Tea party style of rage’ does not exist. It is phrase used by people on the left to demonize the entirely peaceful, quiet meetings of the Tea Party. I think it comes from a couple things.

First, Tea Party people were polite, cleaned up after themselves, and demanded meaningful answers. That terrifies the left. Tea party rallies were larger, more enthusiastic, and asked hard questions; like “How can we do this to our grandkids? The left couldn’t effectively answer that so:

Second, They tried to portray Tea Partiers as racist and violent. Neither of which can be substantiated. They then tried to present their own grassroots group, the Occupy movement. They couldn’t find people who would do the protest thing for idealistic reasons so they financed their demonstrations.

Tea Party people were, and are, not full of rage. Occupiers are. Tea Party people consist largely of Grammas and Grampas. Occupiers consist mainly of young people who reject responsibility.

Non-whites voted for the 666 candidate. It’s not clear to me all are fiscally liberal. I think Christian, rich, white guy candidates are out of their comfort zone.

Most new immigrants come from corrupt regimes. Although they fled oppressive government, it has a familiarity with which they are comfortable. They subconsciously vote it in.

Probably Mitt would have got in if Ryan, and other Republicans candidates had left the abortion issue alone, if voter ID laws were in place, and Romney’s stance on immigrant legalization didn’t help. I agree with it, but it cost the election. It seems the growing immigrant population does not share similar social views of Republicans.

There are a lot of Republican voters who didn’t vote. The party has seen an influx of Libertarians in the last several years. They bought the GOP line that they needed to change the party from within, that since we have a two-party system, voting third party was a waste of their vote.

They got involved; really involved in this area. They got members elected as Precinct Committee Officers, attended party caucuses, conventions, took part in forming platforms, etc..

Not voting for Romney once he was the nominee because he wasn’t conservative enough or voting Libertarian because he wasn’t free market enough is an example of what we call “going full retard”. These people are no wiser, more honorable or more admirable than Michael Moore. They are the left’s useful idiots.

I like Ron Paul. I have read his books. I’m not a big fan of isolationism even though it is enticing. His followers are a bit on the fringe though (that’s the best I got). I think Paul would be a great guy to have in charge of every government program. EXCEPT Defense. I can’t imagine a scenario where somebody that backs Paul could justify voting for Obama based on policy. It would have to be an emotional reaction.